The Kano State High Court, under Chief Judge Justice Dije Aboki, has postponed its ruling on a key application aimed at halting renovations at the historic Nasarawa mini palace, associated with the 15th Emir of Kano, Aminu Ado Bayero. The court has scheduled the ruling for October 10, 2024.

The case involves several plaintiffs, including the Kano State Government, the Attorney General, and the Kano Emirate Council, who are advocating for the preservation of the palace’s current structure and cultural heritage. They oppose any modernization efforts proposed by Emir Bayero, who stands as the sole defendant. During the recent hearing, plaintiff’s attorney Habib Akilu pointed out that the legal representation for the defendant was absent.

“The substantive application is ready for hearing,” Akilu stated, requesting an interlocutory injunction to prevent the Emir from “reconstructing, demolishing, or altering the mini palace” until the court issues a final judgment. In response, Justice Aboki has set the ruling date for October 10 and mandated that all relevant court documents be displayed on the court’s notice board to keep all parties informed of the proceedings.

ALSO READ: NANTA Strengthens Partnership with Ibom Air to Boost Airline Growth

Previously, the plaintiffs obtained an interim injunction on September 13, 2024, which barred the Emir from initiating any renovation work following the introduction of a proposed modernization plan for the palace. This interim ruling stemmed from an ex parte motion filed by the plaintiffs’ lead counsel, Senior Advocate of Nigeria (SAN) Rilwanu Umar, on September 12. Supported by a 33-paragraph affidavit from Matawallen Kano, Ibrahim Ahmed, the plaintiffs contended that altering the palace would compromise its historical significance and cultural value.

“The Nasarawa mini palace is a symbol of our heritage,” emphasized Alhaji Ibrahim Ahmed. “Any modernization, particularly the proposed renovations, would diminish the architectural essence and historical integrity this palace represents.” The court had previously instructed all parties to uphold the structural and architectural integrity of the palace while awaiting its final decision.